A qualitative evaluation and conceptual framework on the use of the Birth weight and Age-at-death Boxes for Intervention and Evaluation System (BABIES) matrix for perinatal health in Uganda.

BACKGROUND: Perinatal mortality (newborn deaths in the first week of life and stillbirths) continues to be a significant global health threat, particularly in resource-constrained settings. Low-tech, innovative solutions that close the quality-of-care gap may contribute to progress toward the Sustainable Development Goals for health by 2030. From 2012 to 2018, the Saving Mothers, Giving Life Initiative (SMGL) implemented the Birth weight and Age-at-Death Boxes for Intervention and Evaluation System (BABIES) matrix in Western Uganda. The BABIES matrix provides a simple, standardized way to track perinatal health outcomes to inform evidence-based quality improvement strategies. METHODS: In November 2017, a facility-based qualitative evaluation was conducted using in-depth interviews with 29 health workers in 16 health facilities implementing BABIES in Uganda. Data were analyzed using directed content analysis across five domains: 1) perceived ease of use, 2) how the matrix was used, 3) changes in behavior or standard operating procedures after introduction, 4) perceived value of the matrix, and 5) program sustainability. RESULTS: Values in the matrix were easy to calculate, but training was required to ensure correct data placement and interpretation. Displaying the matrix on a highly visible board in the maternity ward fostered a sense of accountability for health outcomes. BABIES matrix reports were compiled, reviewed, and responded to monthly by interprofessional teams, prompting collaboration across units to fill data gaps and support perinatal death reviews. Respondents reported improved staff communication and performance appraisal, community engagement, and ability to track and link clinical outcomes with actions. Midwives felt empowered to participate in the problem-solving process. Respondents were motivated to continue using BABIES, although sustainability concerns were raised due to funding and staff shortages. CONCLUSIONS: District-level health systems can use data compiled from the BABIES matrix to inform policy and guide implementation of community-centered health practices to improve perinatal heath. Future work may consider using the Conceptual Framework on Use of the BABIES Matrix for Perinatal Health as a model to operationalize concepts and test the impact of the tool over time.

Exploring the Vaginal Microbiome and Intravaginal Practices in Postmenopausal Women.

BACKGROUND: Evidence suggests that intravaginal practices (IVPs) women use to cleanse their vagina or enhance sexual pleasure may be associated with unhealthy changes in the vaginal microbiome (VM). However, the effects of these practices in postmenopausal women are unknown. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this pilot study was to characterize the VM communities of postmenopausal women, identify types and frequency of IVPs, and explore associations between the VM and IVPs in postmenopausal women. METHODS: We analyzed the VM data of 21 postmenopausal women in Atlanta, Georgia, from vaginal swabs collected at a routine gynecological visit. 16S rRNA gene sequencing in the V3-V4 region was used to characterize the VM. In addition, we described the IVPs of these women, identified by using our newly developed instrument: the Vaginal Cleansing Practices Questionnaire. The associations between the VM and IVPs were explored by comparing the alpha diversities, beta diversities, and the relative abundances at both the community level and individual genus level. RESULTS: The most abundant known bacterial genus found in the VM samples was Lactobacillus (35.7%), followed by Prevotella (21.4%). Eleven women (52%) reported using at least one type of IVP since menopause. The most common type of IVP was soap and water to clean inside the vagina. The use of IVPs was not associated with any alpha diversity metric, including Shannon index, inverse Simpson index, and Chao1 index; beta diversity metric, including Bray-Curtis and Jaccard distances; nor relative abundances at the community and individual genus level. Sociodemographic factors were also not associated with any alpha diversity metric. DISCUSSION: Clinicians must assess IVPs and other vaginal and sexual hygiene practices of women of all ages to educate and promote healthy behaviors. More than half of the postmenopausal women in this pilot study use IVPs. Understanding the reasoning behind participants' use of IVPs and their perceptions of the possible effects of these practices will require further research. Although the small sample did not show associations with the VM, more extensive studies are warranted.

Intersectionality in nursing research: A scoping review.

Background: An intersectional approach to health research provides an analytical foundation to explain the multidimensionality of health status, resource accessibility, privilege, oppression, and current and historical context. The use of intersectionality in health research has known limitations. Its use in health-related fields too often focuses on outcomes, such as health disparities, rather than processes, such as power structures and social determinants. Objective: This scoping review serves to examine how intersectionality has been implemented by nurses in the peer-reviewed literature. We offer insight into how it may be incorporated to inform future nursing research and healthcare provision. Design & Methods: Systematic searches of PubMed (n = 257), SCOPUS (n = 807), EMBASE (n = 396), CINAHL (n = 224), and Health Source: Nursing and Academics (n = 491), published since the seminal publication on intersectionality (1989 - 2023), identified 131 research articles that met inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data extraction and synthesis were used to describe the breadth and depth of the literature specific to the application of intersectionality in nursing research. Results: The included studies used intersectionality to examine the intersections of numerous identities, such as race, gender, and immigration status. However, most studies were descriptive/observational in nature, underreported their methods, and conducted deficit-based research instead of strength-based inquiries. Of note, the vast majority of included articles were published within the last five years. Conclusions: Future researchers using intersectionality as a framework can improve their approach by reporting clear definitions and operationalization of intersectionality. Observational science dominated the included studies; future research should focus on intervention development and evaluation using an intersectional lens. Lastly, caution should be placed on research that focuses solely on deficits among marginalized communities, which places scientists at risk of perpetuating stereotypes or enhancing already-existing stigmas.